View Single Post
Unread 9 Dec 2015, 00:18   #33
[B5]Londo
Paso Leaute
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of[B5]Londo has much to be proud of
Re: Prelaunch(again)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Initialy i left out wether the "prelaunch" penalty would affect both defending and attacking fleets, intentionaly.
Do i think it should be a penalty for prelaunching def? no.
Why do i want a "return" penalty for prelaunching attacking? so people cant "fake prelaunch" to soak up defence.
I assume that this is anticipating a problem that will arise, since fake prelaunching is pretty rare atm.
Tbh i dont see a problem with the idea that fake prelaunchs is the risk you take if you 'pre-DC' your incs. I do see that that would run counter to what you are trying to achieve, but i do like there being another strategy added to the game.

One of the problems with this idea of being able to reveal a land tick or similar with a scan is that atm PL def is a rare event, if it becomes the norm then that has a profound affect on the way meta clases interact with each other. CR/BS def against FR/DE and FR/DE def against FI/CO will be much more common.
Obviously this is an issue for the stats maker, but it is something I have not seen mentioned, and seems worth flagging up.
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?

Last edited by [B5]Londo; 9 Dec 2015 at 00:24.
[B5]Londo is offline   Reply With Quote